Re: VMs: Re: Re: Inks and retouching

[Nick Pelling <nickpelling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi GC,

At 02:50 29/07/2004 -0600, GC wrote:
> Ink stain on f93r - Nick, my laughing is waking the neighborhood, but I'm
> trying to laugh loud enough for you to hear me all the way to England.  You
> of all people should know how much time I have invested in this folio.  I
> can recite both the script and the plaintext for this folio in my sleep!  I
> know the four errors made on this page by the author, and I'd ask you to
> correctly identify them.  You know I only release certain details of f78r
> because I "own" f93r and protect that knowledge.  Bringing this folio into a
> serious discussion on "retouching" shouldn't be a laughing matter however,
> so plese parden my lak of edikette, and let me get serious about this folio.
> Retouching is evident within the ink stain - and the logic would be, that
> the ink stain somehow obliterated the glyphs so they were in need of
> renewing?  NOT, NAY, never happened.

Ooops, sorry for waking your neighbours, my mistake - I didn't  mean the 
obvious water stain on f93r at all, I actually meant the ink-like stain on 
f103r instead. Of course f93r is the gen-u-wine artigal, there's no 
retouching there at all. It's a different story for f103r, though. :-)

Cheers, .....Nick Pelling..... 


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list